WWVaBeach Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 This morning on Mike & Mike during the SportsCenter segment Bob Picosi (sp) said, "the amazing Sabres are 11-0 with one shootout loss". My question is: If a shootout loss doesn't count, how can a shootout win count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taterhill Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 any win is 2 pts...regular loss is 0 pts...OT/Shootout loss is 1 pt... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 This morning on Mike & Mike during the SportsCenter segment Bob Picosi (sp) said, "the amazing Sabres are 11-0 with one shootout loss". My question is: If a shootout loss doesn't count, how can a shootout win count? 823646[/snapback] That is my beef too. I think there should be 4 columns W-L-T-SOW That is a Win, Loss, Tie, and Shoot Out Win. You get a Tie going into a SO and 1 point... If you win the SO, you get 2 points and a SOW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 any win is 2 pts...regular loss is 0 pts...OT/Shootout loss is 1 pt... 823648[/snapback] Ya... But, they shouldn't put the SO win in the "real" win column... The loss doesn't go into the "real" loss column... What they heck are they (league) trying to say?... SO wins "muddy" the "real" win column and accounting them goes to hell... Historically too, there is no continuity to the past... ie: streaks and records... The Mighty Ducks haven't lost in regulation also this year... Ya, they have a trio or so of SO losses though... They are just up there with the Sabres... Just a few games behind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 My question is: If a shootout loss doesn't count, how can a shootout win count? 823646[/snapback] What do you recommend? The best thing the league did was eliminate the tie, I hated spending $50 or whatever on a ticket and watching a tie. Adding another column for SOW's would just confuse people and take up the whole sports page. A shootout loss does count, but cannot be put in the L column because you get a point for it. A shootout win can be placed in the W column because you get 2 points regardless of how the game was won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 What do you recommend? The best thing the league did was eliminate the tie, I hated spending $50 or whatever on a ticket and watching a tie. Adding another column for SOW's would just confuse people and take up the whole sports page. A shootout loss does count, but cannot be put in the L column because you get a point for it. A shootout win can be placed in the W column because you get 2 points regardless of how the game was won. 823703[/snapback] Exactly. You have 3 columns: 1 that counts as 2 points, 0 points, and 1 point. Adding anything more will only confuse people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I'm a fan of the idea of balanced scoring. It wouldn't help the Sabres out much, but all games should equal the same amount of points the way they did prior to the OTL 1 point rule. If all games are valued at three points apiece, it can work as follows: WIN 3 pts OT / SO WIN 2 pts OT / SO LOSS 1 pt LOSS 0 pts This way every game adds up to a result of 3 pts distributed between the two teams. No game is worth more than any other (i.e. some worth 2, some end up worth 3). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Ya... But, they shouldn't put the SO win in the "real" win column... The loss doesn't go into the "real" loss column... What they heck are they (league) trying to say?... SO wins "muddy" the "real" win column and accounting them goes to hell... Historically too, there is no continuity to the past... ie: streaks and records... The Mighty Ducks haven't lost in regulation also this year... Ya, they have a trio or so of SO losses though... They are just up there with the Sabres... Just a few games behind... 823657[/snapback] Its just because of the way points are divided. The reason why it doesn't go into the loss column is because it gives you a point, therefore its not a loss, but an overtime loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I'm a fan of the idea of balanced scoring. It wouldn't help the Sabres out much, but all games should equal the same amount of points the way they did prior to the OTL 1 point rule. If all games are valued at three points apiece, it can work as follows: WIN 3 pts OT / SO WIN 2 pts OT / SO LOSS 1 pt LOSS 0 pts This way every game adds up to a result of 3 pts distributed between the two teams. No game is worth more than any other (i.e. some worth 2, some end up worth 3). 823801[/snapback] It'll never happen. The whole reason the NHL got rid of the fourth column is it supposedly confused the casual fan, though I agree that a regulation win should be worth three points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWVaBeach Posted November 3, 2006 Author Share Posted November 3, 2006 What do you recommend? The best thing the league did was eliminate the tie, I hated spending $50 or whatever on a ticket and watching a tie. Adding another column for SOW's would just confuse people and take up the whole sports page. A shootout loss does count, but cannot be put in the L column because you get a point for it. A shootout win can be placed in the W column because you get 2 points regardless of how the game was won. 823703[/snapback] I wasn't trying to recommend/change anything, I was just trying to get a better understanding of the whole scoring system and how to read it correctly. I have to admit before this morning I had no idea that we were still "undefeated" with the exception of 1 OTL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 It'll never happen. The whole reason the NHL got rid of the fourth column is it supposedly confused the casual fan, though I agree that a regulation win should be worth three points. 823806[/snapback] The other reason it won't happen is Montreal's 132 and Detroit's 131 would get eclipsed in no time flat by teams barely playing over 0.500. You are correct on all your points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 It'll never happen. The whole reason the NHL got rid of the fourth column is it supposedly confused the casual fan, though I agree that a regulation win should be worth three points. 823806[/snapback] The main problem there was that they were including OTL's in both the loss column and the OTL column (pre-shootout days). The numbers added up to more games than the teams actually played. That would've been easy enough to fix though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 The other reason it won't happen is Montreal's 132 and Detroit's 131 would get eclipsed in no time flat by teams barely playing over 0.500. You are correct on all your points. 823828[/snapback] Seems an easy fix for that would be to look at win% instead of total points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 The main problem there was that they were including OTL's in both the loss column and the OTL column (pre-shootout days). The numbers added up to more games than the teams actually played. That would've been easy enough to fix though. 823847[/snapback] They only did that in '99-'00. Even after the RT was changed to an OTL and wasn't included in the L column, people still complained about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Seems an easy fix for that would be to look at win% instead of total points. 823875[/snapback] Not really, because then you can go back to the '20's and '30's and find teams with better win %ages than either of those 2. For whatever reason, way back when, hockey chose to go with a team points, not a winning percentage (which convey the exact same thing) and I don't see them ever switching systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Flanders Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I hate the shootout...hate it. I know the Sabres have benefited from it, but I still think that ending a 65 minute (with OT), hard hitting, physical game with a finesse-filled shoot out is the wrong approach. I say extend the OT to ten minutes...and if there is a tie, so what. You paid to see hockey and this is it. You lose in OT you get NOTHING and like it...I know the hot-pockets crowd wants to see either a winner or a loser, but I just don't like the shoot-out...it's too European, and too out of line to what the NHL is about. "We lost but we got rewarded with a point!" Socialism at it's finest. I don't buy it. Kinda like the Seinfeld episode where they're watching the NYC Marathon from a friend's apartment and some dope yells out the window, "You're all winners!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 I hate the shootout...hate it. I know the Sabres have benefited from it, but I still think that ending a 65 minute (with OT), hard hitting, physical game with a finesse-filled shoot out is the wrong approach. I say extend the OT to ten minutes...and if there is a tie, so what. You paid to see hockey and this is it. You lose in OT you get NOTHING and like it...I know the hot-pockets crowd wants to see either a winner or a loser, but I just don't like the shoot-out...it's too European, and too out of line to what the NHL is about. "We lost but we got rewarded with a point!" Socialism at it's finest. I don't buy it. Kinda like the Seinfeld episode where they're watching the NYC Marathon from a friend's apartment and some dope yells out the window, "You're all winners!" 823931[/snapback] Let me ask, do you ever turn the TV off when there is a game in a shootout? I was skeptical at first, but I have to say it brings a new level of stratagem to the game and displays talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Flanders Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Let me ask, do you ever turn the TV off when there is a game in a shootout? 823936[/snapback] No, and I would expect the same question from Bettman. That's not the point. I just think the shoot-out is a post full-year-work-stoppage "contraption," designed to appeal to people who weren't hockey fans in the first place. But, we need those people you ask...really? There are some who appeal to this scheme, but improve the first sixty minutes of play, i.e. the two-line pass, and you improve the product and you "gain" fans that way. Don't cheapen the product. Christ, I've been walking in and out of hockey barns for over 40 years, and I never once heard anyone mutter: "Jeeziz, a tie, do I feel hosed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Let me ask, do you ever turn the TV off when there is a game in a shootout? I was skeptical at first, but I have to say it brings a new level of stratagem to the game and displays talent. 823936[/snapback] And if you ever attended a game that went to a shootout, the whole building is electric and no on sits during the whole thing. The only thing that gets confusing is the "goals for" column. You get a goal for winning a shootout but the team doesn't really score the goal during the game, so you have to subtract SO wins from the "goals for" to get the actual goals scored total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loadofmularkey Posted November 3, 2006 Share Posted November 3, 2006 Christ, I've been walking in and out of hockey barns for over 40 years, and I never once heard anyone mutter: "Jeeziz, a tie, do I feel hosed." 823946[/snapback] Er, I guess we haven't been going to the same hockey barns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts